On Tuesday, June 4, 2019 at 10:35:20 AM UTC+3, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Newsgroups: sci.math
> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 14:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: "Stupidity Era of a Science Topic or the entire Science itself" //
> history of science
> From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
> Injection-Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2019 21:23:02 +0000
>
> "Stupidity Era of a Science Topic or the entire Science itself" // history of science
>
> Now here I need a new Science term to describe the evolution of a science when that science is filled with Nutters, goofballs and kooks, so that the science of mathematics goes from trigonometry being an aid to computing the three sides and angles of a right triangle, once, given two sides or given a side and one angle (other than the 90 degree). How that mushroomed into being the ultimate stupidity that fills Calculus textbooks of today. How such a innocent piece of math aid some 500 years ago, cascaded into such a huge cesspool of pollution in mathematics of today.
>
> Now physics is not free of this cascading pollution caused by kooks and nutters of a science. For we easily can see that Maxwell by 1860s was developing the great true electromagnetism theory which would dominate all physics, but in the interim of 1870 to 1990 you had all these nutters and kooks of physics polluting and destroying physics with their General Relativity, big bang, black holes, brown holes, neutron stars, gravity waves, dark matter dark energy, reads like a list of cartoon sci fi.
>
> So we need a science term that describes when a science goes through a period of mass cesspool pollution, filling their time period with just junk junk fake science.
>
> Is it decadence? No, that is too mild.
>
> Is it de-evolution? No, that is not descriptive.
>
> Is it Disorder-entropy? No, that is not descriptive.
>
> For now, I have to just say *Stupidity Era*.
>
> Biology seems to have missed out on Stupidity Era if we discount the "Creationist View".
>
> Perhaps "Retrograde" is a meaningful description.
>
> A science seems to have time periods in which little-fishes of science come up with garbage ideas that hold sway over the community, but in the long haul of science are seen as kooks with kook ideas.
>
> In the past I used to think that science was like a flowing stream, and even bad kook ideas were part of the stream that gets to the true underlying science. But looking at physics with is mountain of trash fakery-- big bang, black holes, dark matter, gravity waves-- I can see that all of that is just swept away and not a single bit of that fakery helped to usher in the true physics. None of it was an aid to the truth. But it appears as all of it was "destructive to the truth".
>
> Reminds me sort of the Geology history of Earth where we had a deep deep freeze in geological past and remarkable that it did not extinguish all life. So these spasms of Destructive Math such as trigonometry for 500 years 1500 to 2000 and trigonometry and physics 130 years from 1860 to 1990 with its mountain of fakery. Just today one can read bozos of physics saying that "gravity overwhelms Pauli Exclusion Principle" just to keep their kook black hole.
>
> So in evolution of true science, do we have this intermittent dark periods of Eras of Stupidity. And of what use are they? For they just waste time and they actively oppose the true science. So maybe they do have a flavor of Entropy, a disorder so that the "order can emerge", a yin yang sort of mix. And who is to say that the craziness of black holes is any degree different from the craziness of filling Calculus textbooks with sine and cosine when they never belonged.
>
> Sort of reminds me of the "Sense and Nonsense genes in the body". That the Nonsense genes vastly outnumber the Sense genes. Maybe the Stupid Science is like a place holder in the march of science to truth. To gain truth, cannot be a straightline affair but has to take time with long periods of "no advance" and even regressions of the truth.
>
> Maybe that is the term and concept I seek-- Regression Science, as opposed to True or Progressive Science.
>
> Much of physics today is Regressive and so is much of mathematics of today. And we can detail Regressive science as Retarded-regressive and Stalled-regressive. My recent discovery that Meiosis needs a overhaul is an example of Stalled-regressive. And my recent example of the Saber Toothed Tiger is an example of Retarded-regressive. Sort of like cancer-- all of it is bad but when it metastasizes it is malignant-regression but if it remains in situ is stalled-regression.
>
> Maybe cancer is the term for eras of stupidity in science.
>
> Biology's Meiosis Error Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Be the first to review this item
>
>
> See all formats and editions
> • Kindle
> • $0.00 


Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles 
$9.99 to buy
>
> Fixing the huge error of Biology--Meiosis has no duplication.
>
> No mitosis duplicates the DNA, and then we have the Meiosis, and because no mitosis goes from 46 chromosomes to 92 chromosomes all the math failure biologists want to go from 46 chromosomes to 92, and end up with their goal of 23 end result.
>
> Why did the biologists from 1953 to 2019 fall into this math trap? I think it was because they all saw a "Spindle" And the moment a biologist sees a spindle is the moment they lapse into crazy ideas of duplication. They never bother to do a chemistry analysis whether there was duplication or whether there was no duplication.
>
> PROVE PROVE PROVE that meiosis in humans does or does not go from 46 chromosomes to 92 chromosomes. Stop saying, just because you see a spindle, that duplication is going on. Prove it with chemistry and physics if it is going from 46 to 92, or if not.
>
> Length: 142 pages
> Word Wise: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
> Page Flip: Enabled
>
> File Size: 1060 KB
> Print Length: 142 pages
> Publication Date: March 13, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PRXPHS3
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled
> X-Ray: 
Not Enabled 

> Word Wise: Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
>
> Was the Saber-Toothed-Tiger, Smilodon, Paleontologists most laughable mistake? Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Be the first to review this item
>
>
> See all formats and editions
> • Kindle
> • $0.00 


Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles 
$3.00 to buy
>
> Ever since I was a teenager in High School, I was troubled with the saber-toothed tiger-- how evolution could have built such an animal. But I was not logical in mind as a teenager, and had to wait until now to let my logical mind survey that perplexing question. To an extraordinary claim in science-- huge teeth that an animal cannot cope with, requires extra-special evidence and proofs of science. How can evolution theory (even though it is a rule or algorithm) (see my Superdeterminism replaces Darwin Evolution book), how can evolution produce an animal with teeth that "get in the way of everything" as the animal goes through life. So, I am asking the science community to completely re-examine the fossil evidence of Smilodon. I do not have that evidence available, but the entire Paleontology community can make the evidence available. For what I suspect is that the tiger never had saber-teeth and that those teeth found in digs or tar pits, were the teeth of Entelodonts or some ungulate horn or walrus type animal teeth. In other words, I question the claim there ever existed a cat with huge canine teeth.
>
> Cover Picture: What spurred me onto this small book was a few days ago seeing the cover of Science News showing a Saber-Toothed Tiger. And how utterly ridiculous for a tiger to have those teeth. And just as ridiculous that grown scientists believe such nonsense without questioning it.
>
> Length: 16 pages
> Word Wise: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
>
> File Size: 1681 KB
> Print Length: 16 pages
> Publication Date: March 30, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07Q7RLD4F
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled
> X-Ray: 
Not Enabled 

> Word Wise: Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,822,656 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #218 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> #278 in Paleontology (Kindle Store)
> #1383 in Paleontology (Books)
>
> Newsgroups: sci.physics
> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 20:12:22 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: history of sciences and how they arise Re: "Stupidity Era of a
> Science Topic or the entire Science itself" // history of science
> From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 03:12:23 +0000
>
> history of sciences and how they arise Re: "Stupidity Era of a Science Topic or the entire Science itself" // history of science
>
> Perhaps, although it sounds arrogant, is that the sciences of Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Astronomy are the feats of very great scientists and in between them, is a time of kook corruption of the science.
>
> In Physics it is
>
> Kepler & Galileo
> .
> .
> Newton
> .
> .
> Faraday & Maxwell
> .
> .
> AP
>
> And in between these great feats of synthesis of the entire science, that interim is full of corrupt fake science that needs cleaning up and cleaning out the kook science that was established in the in-between periods.
>
>
> For Mathematics the history is much like this:
>
> Euclid-Archimedes
> .
> .
> Fibonacci with decimals
> .
> .
> Newton & Leibniz
> .
> .
> AP
>
> And all the in-between stuff in math was small stuff, or outright kookishness.
>
> In this analysis of the history of mathematics is that these sciences are only advanced once a great scientist appears, and rarely appears, to clean up and clean out the fakery and kook stuff that accumulated.
>
> AP
>
> Newsgroups: sci.physics
> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 21:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: history of sciences and how they arise Re: "Stupidity Era of a
> Science Topic or the entire Science itself" // history of science
> From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 04:42:53 +0000
>
> history of sciences and how they arise Re: "Stupidity Era of a Science Topic or the entire Science itself" // history of science
>
>
> That is the remarkable story of trigonometry. It was seen some thousand years ago as a tool, that is you know an angle and side of right- triangle, you can find all the angles and sides of that right triangle. But no , kooks of math cannot leave that alone but build a superstructure of trig kookery that it engulfs 50% of Calculus when it should not even be in Calculus at all.
>
> Are there any parallels to this in history? I think when a great city is borne to deal with a region, then soon springs up a shanty town on the fringes.
>
> AP